Profile of WhiteFlash

And I appreciate the repsonses Sturmpanther, I'm sorry if this comes off abrasive. I just hope some thought is put into considering the approaches I laid out and reconsidering voting to improve the ladder map pool. Process is critical to success.

1. Relic give almost /no ressoruce to improve coh1 or coh2. This game is old and they focus on new projects. Means the patches are community based.

Lets use the leeway that relic has given the community to show them how powerful our participation can be instead of using the same, inefficient "lets vote in 1 thread on 1 site" solutions that have been used since the dawn of COH. It used to be used out of necessity but now we have better tools and way more powerful possibilities if we choose to use them.

2. Yes I don't have that hardcore scope as it is for unitpatches. Because DBP was such a success, so Relic gives me alot of freespace. But 1 thing is clear from RELIC: They don't want to remove many maps. Aka to have only like 6 maps in 1vs1. So removing maps is not that easy to bargain from relic as you guys maybe think. Same counts for adding new maps into automatch. Don't forget; Its THEIR GAME.

14 maps is not 6. Whatever minimum they can stomach should be aimed for considering some of the lower quality maps still in rotation. And you shouldn't have to bargain with them. Relic has to see the merit in this reality and the potential to possibly double the quality of the map pool. It is their game, as I stated in my last post.

3. It is super fucking time gorging. Most people have 0 idea how much time it cost. And that for free!

Yea anyone who puts as much time in this as you do should be paid something, not joking. Some people have put thousands upon thousands of hours into COH. You are one of them, which is outstanding. And I 100% understand how much time it takes.

4. The first big improvement happend in the DBP. And i think I can say, it was a super success the mappatch at all; reworking and removing maps. So that should speak for me, that I understand something about maps; Whiteflash. Yes I self never created an own map. I don't have this time. Tho I would say I learnt alot about how maps and WB works and why some maps are bad other good. The next fact is, that I play 1vs1 to 4vs4. So all Gamemode on a high lv (less played in 1vs1 tho. That's why i am very careful in 1vs1 map decision!). So i know the gamestyle on the maps. If not, I could not make all this decisions (from strategy)

True, and agreed that patch was an improvement love to see it, the bar set by the map pool in the past was very low to be fair.

5. But thats why I self don't change the maps. I tell / ask mapmakers to make the changes. So i can't fuck up the map Tho I have always to double check their works and like: they cutting a fence, but its to small for britpak. But works for normal inf and other paks. Or they replace a house, but you can't go inside the house. Or they add the HP from the house, but its not working, or they just forget to remove a car; putting some wood things to green cover or bushes, so that units will stay in yellow cover and not green cover; houses with 1 doors, etc. Happend all already. There is alot difference between WB and ingame.

This is one of my biggest problems. Your the one person telling the mappers what to do. This is where your lack of skill in map design and your insistence to take charge of mapping enterprises is a problem. The amount of potential decisions needed to be made to balance a map has to come from an enormous amount of time invested in each map. Thoroughness and design experience is key. Not just experience with the worldbuilder, but experience designing ladder worthy maps. With respect, you don't have the experience and you definitely don't have the time to be thorough because your doing so much stuff for the community as is.

6. Top 10 players from 1vs1, 2vs2: When you work a while in this buisness ( Maps or unit patch) you will see very fast 2 things:
First many of them don't care in start to improve anything. This would cost THEIR TIME LUL. Its always easier to complain, when the unitpatch or mappatch is out.
Second many of them can say you: This map is unfair or the brits vs wehrmacht etc. But they tell you only the obvious thing. Not WHY it is. Its always like: North side is easier / OP, but don't ask me why. Reason: They don't know the stats from the units or the pathing, timing from each points. Best example: Nobody said from top players in 1vs1 ever, that like fuel or vp points are wrong from timing on famyonville.

This is where your lack of map design will again, cause problems. Your first point is only partly true, people complain and are affected by their bias when they win (think the map is great) and when they lose (think the map is bad). The experience of the mapper will be the filter to remove the bias and understand the map as a system and adjust the design as the mapper sees fit. If you have an inexperienced mapper or some kind of manager (you in this case) dictating changes the map wont be improved as much as it could be otherwise.

Your second point is true, and thats why thoroughness and design experience is critical. If those two things are ignored then the quality will suffer, and things will move slower.

7. Indeed, when someone had bring good infos and time for a special map, I had consider to let the map in the pool as well. But my time is limited. I personal think this Mappatch will be awesome again. Alot of good changes are in.

Agreed

8. When I think back before DBP about ingame situation. I always self was complaining about maps and had no idea what maps gets my veto. Because I needed like dobule amount of vetos to get rip of all the bad maps. Right now i acutally have sometimes the case, that I have 1 veto remaining in 3vs3, 4vs4. And in somecase in 2vs2 as well. So i think the system of work kind of work. The map and mappool in the automatch are way better now. When you think back in the past, how it was. I personal would not want to play in 2016-2017 back^^. Pls don't forget that. I always have the feeling for some people: " you give them the small finger, and they just grab for the whole hand"

Better, but the past map pool was an extremely low bar to set. The 3v3 and 4v4 pool are in desperate need of upgrade.

9. I think the poll for the DBP for removing maps from 1vs1-4vs4 each worked very well. Had around 100 people voting for each modus. I personal always prefer to have more data instead of only 1. And yes there i put almost all maps to vote. This time I did not; REASON: I knew people did not checked the reworked version out from westwall, lost glider, angoville etc. They almost never do. So it would make the poll wrong. It happend already for unitpatch mod: We asked always: Did you played the mod, before you vote, but we all know you just can lie LUL.

100 people voted per mode. 100.

There were, just in 2v2 mode, about 430,000 games played when this data was procured. How can you possibly think that 100 people voting in 2v2 is more illustrative of reality than this much data.


Again this data and much more of it if Relic were willing to share, with expert players and expert mappers could work in conjunction to generate better map quality faster and more effectively than the current solution.

10. Stats about how often a map got picked/ played: You asked why I think they are not that strong. I see you really like and prefer Stats, whiteflash.
The game is not only played from top 100 players! So alot of games happens on low elo as well. Don't forget that!
And about Road to khaorkov. The only way I can explain it to me, why it is the second most picked map:
People think: " Hey, I have a 50% chance, that I get south side and almost a freewin on a map. feelsgoodman". North side is really hard to play. So acutally this map should be completed on the bottom on the played maps.
--> Means the stats does not work here very well. Because when you are the second most palyed map from like 20 maps; this map should be super good! Oh wait

[b]This is a PRC list for designing systems for NASA.[/b]
This is one of dozens of specifications that you have to be familiar with and understand to design anything for the environments and applications that are involved in aerospace engineering. I work with these every single day, which is a tiny portion of what my experience base involves in RL. Im not bragging I'm pointing out something. I don't "prefer" stats, they are the basis for good design and clear thinking and rational decision making.

The power and potential of statistical analysis and large swaths of data are so huge that it would be, at best, irresponsible to ignore them and we are lucky to have the luxury to obtain them at all.

SiphonX for president 2020

11. Since you think poll and asking the community is timewaste, we will not ask them about 2vs2. I just will announce here right now for people, who are interest in maps and read this whole thread: 1 2vs2 map will get removed! Hype.

12. Next problem is Wintermaps. Relic and me prefer to have wintermaps in this game. It looks good and you have skins for your vehicles in winterversion; its a part of this game. Yes I agree to have the complete same map in sommer and winter makes not really sense. And for people who hates the map anyway, it cost them 2 vetos for 1 gamestyle-map
So right now there will be follow Wintermaps:
1vs1: Westwall and Semoskiy Winter
2vs2: Moscow Winter and Semoskiy Winter
3vs3: Resh Winter, Oka river and Lagleize
4vs4: Vielsam and Lagleize

I hope I could bring some light in this here all.

Ok


My main point again, is that you aren't an experienced ladder mapper, you aren't even a regular mapper. Its damn hard to be a good competitive mapper. And the approaches that are being taken to improve the map pool is not the best approach. The rational for the map changes cant come from 1 guy whos mapping experience is as low as it is, especially when you have guys who have more than enough experience and skill to do the job, and im not talking about USING the worldbuilder, I'm talking about making the design decisions and solving the design problems and being the filter for information from people, that's extremely difficult if you don't have experience.

If coh2.org is going to have a contact point for map overhaul it should go through someone that is at least qualified to do this job. That person should be the lead mapper for COH2.org, which in this case is Tric. And he should be able to use his discretion to communicate with Relic about changes to the map pool.

You can support him if you like, anyone can but to have someone that is in your position leading ladder mapping solutions with your current approaches to drive development is crude at best. Sorry once again if this seems like I'm being abrasive, its not my intention. The map pools improvement is and always has been the goal. You must understand that we both want the same thing. Im offering a better path forward. I hope my experience and mapping products speak for themselves.

I also appreciate the continued support of everyone. Thanks.

Couldn't get the twitch highlights to embed so links are posted, feel free to post your own it was a good time!


Theres likely a lot more hilarious/great moments that I haven't bothered to clip. Enjoy.

Stuve 2020 https://clips.twitch.tv/GeniusShyRabbitSpicyBoy

Von Ivan goes balls deep https://clips.twitch.tv/ExuberantObservantOctopusWutFace

Part 1 https://clips.twitch.tv/BoldDelightfulMomANELE

Part 2 https://clips.twitch.tv/TenaciousPrettyJellyfishCoolCat

RNJesus saves the day https://clips.twitch.tv/CloudyProudCrocodilePermaSmug

Before you read this I don't have anything against Sturmpanther or anyone in particular. The quality of the map pool is #1 here, the pace of innovation here is far below what is possible, there are better ways. Please keep that in mind as you read. Thank you.
_________________________________________________________________________

"I know the exact stats for all maps from 1vs1- 4vs4. Relic has his own datebase for that.
But we (Relic and me) saw no reason not to ask the communtiy how they feel."

You're not asking people "how they feel", you're taking a poll to pick maps to remove.

"We will look how the vote will end and there is a good chance, that 2 1vs1 maps will get removed!"
_________________________________________________________________________

The map pool has been worked on for over 5 years. The map pool has maybe 2 great 1v1 competitive maps out of 14. Lets call that number 4. That means COH2 has generated .8 good 1v1 maps per year. .8/year. This rate is so low we have to look critically at the format that Relic and the community has taken in regards to the map pool and maps in general.

This idea that if we take a small portion of the coh2 community who visits coh2.org and bothers to vote on a random poll from a random coh2.org admin (and relic assisting somehow? were not told how these maps were chosen?) with a random set of maps, this will improve the map pool quality. This without some explanation from Relic or Sturmpanther seems confusing at best.

If your goal is to improve the map pool this is not the way to do it. I've never understood why map designers in conjunction with Relics map designers don't work in conjunction to refine maps that are understood to be salvageable and dump the rest, then design new maps that can be injected into the pool. I understand this has been done at a painfully slow rate and yielded an even slower return of quality maps (~.8/year) so a more aggressive and well controlled solution should be put into action with a Relic mapper at the head of the effort that should stay in motion for the duration of COHs lifecycle. Get the best mappers together with the best Relic mappers or people of action, organize a focused group of testers who are willing to dedicate time to focused testing and reliably posting replays for mappers to analyze then make changes and repeat.
_________________________________________________________________________

For example:

Trics map recently got into automatch so he should be able to update the map as he observes games on it and updates his theories and understanding of his creation, there shouldn't be artificial limits on his, or Relics, or anyone's ability to implement improvements (within reason). Maps that have been in the pool for a long time but have shown sub-par quality should be removed without a second thought. If the map pool shrinks temporarily it doesn't hurt anyone, it removes the chaff from the wheat so to speak. Then new maps can be, after thorough design and testing, added to ladder to see how it does, while keeping a core of reasonably good maps to keep the pool strong.

This is a classic design/engineering problem that have clear solutions. One of those solutions is not to vote on designs with a small portion of the community. Data and experienced intuition drives development.
_________________________________________________________________________

And you Sturmpanther, to my knowledge, have never designed any COH maps let alone a high quality competitive map. With that in mind, have you or Relic involved high level mappers in the community in these 3 map choices that were put up? Or are you making decisions that you think are right, and if so based on what? It cant be the former because of this seemingly random 3 maps we have to vote on. You have to be more responsible than this if your goal is to improve the map pool as efficiently as possible. I'm mostly talking to Relic here as its their map pool not Sturmpanthers, he is just doing his best with the methods he is familiar with. I give him props for putting so much time and effort into COH as it is.

The potential here, as with most of COH is enormous and it isn't served with these exercises that have proven over and over not to yield results in a reasonable timeline. There are plenty of times to involve the community with voting, this isn't one of them. People already vote with their vetos in ladder, which translate to data that tells you how often maps are played, that coupled with balance data has to drive decisions here.



I'm not saying everything Relic has don't with the map pool has been bad, but this voting on maps to remove is confusing at best. We are very lucky that we have access to an enormous amount of data thanks to SiphonX.

"Tho we are not only argument about stats. Reason: second most picked / played map is Road to kharkov in 2vs2 LUL"
Elaborate

"Also some of lowest picked maps in 1vs1 got reworked again. You should know this...
Let's cross the fingers people will give the maps another chance."
True, but what is the time limit your giving the reworked maps to show weather or not they have achieved the quality that we all demand from the ladder map pool? Do we wait 3 months? 6? 12? Genuinely curious here. And how many times do you rework a map before you remove it? Limits should be set and metrics have to be established to generate a pipeline where quality can flow.

"And the maps are not random pulled!"
Elaborate.

"Thank you for your NOT confidence."
Confidence in a peer is not given, its earned.
_________________________________________________________________________

Please reconsider this voting course of action and focus on a solution like any designer would in any other design environment with constraints and a clear goal.

I urge people to show support for this post on this thread if they care about the ladder map pool.

This vote is a waste of time and makes no sense, use data to eliminate the worst maps.